Antibusing forces framed their cause as upholding Brown’s color-blind principle rather than as resistance.

Evidence

With flowery language, the suburban antibusing movement insisted that the “true and essential meaning” of the landmark 1954 decision guaranteed that “children shall be free to attend public schools without regard to their race or color
 . Does not this case present a clear and appropriate context in which to lift high again that guiding light?” 
 In April 1971, ruling in Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg, the Supreme Court rejected this argument and unanimously upheld the discretionary authority of Judge McMillan. — Matthew D. Lassiter, The Suburban Origins of “Color-Blind”
, 99

Categorization

  • ADDENDUM: This is the central rebranding move — treating segregation resistance as fidelity to Brown — and is strong evidence of how a rationalizing ideology publicly recasts itself before retreat.
  • DEFINE: Shows concretely what ‘color-blind’ reinterpretation of Brown entailed textually: the reversal that made equal protection mean refusal to consider race at all.
  • recurring: this claim recurs 2 times within its source
  • XREF: connects to: Defeated at court, antibusing forces reframed resistance as class favoritism against working-class neighborhoods. — Matthew D. Lassiter, The Suburban Origins of “Color-Blind”
, 101; Colorblind formalism rescued racism when movements threatened its material order. — David Theo Goldberg, The Threat of Race: Reflections on
, 128; White resistance persisted via color-blind punitive policies replacing overt racial terrorism — Nikole Hannah-Jones et al., The 1619 Project: A New American Origin
, 851 (+5 more)

Broader Connections